Law and reality in publishing (seldom the same thing) from the author's side of the slush pile, with occasional forays into military affairs, censorship and the First Amendment, legal theory, and anything else that strikes me as interesting.

05 November 2008

November Surprise Sausages

These sausages aren't quite as late as the last batch... but they're mostly overcured, oversalted, and over here.

Libel suits are often exceptionally silly. Sometimes that's because the statement at issue is itself silly, or at minimum inadequately considered. And I'm not referring to hyperbole such as "Sarah Palin's performance in the Vice-Presidental debate exceeded expectations only because there weren't any", but to factual allegations. Then, conversely, there are attempts to use libel suits to suppress unfavorable factual material that does have adequate support. I've discussed "libel tourism" repeatedly in this blawg; bluntly, libel laws that prevent a person from asserting their own free speech rights under their own governing law violate the UN Charter and basic principles of human rights, but that's a complicated argument for another time. It gets really ridiculous when someone files a libel suit over a scientist's statement.

On the intellectual property front, there has been some good news. For one thing, Harvard has backed out of the immensely flawed AG/Google settlement for in-copyright works. Since that's about the first commendable thing that Harvard (as an institution) has done on the copyright front this century, perhaps there's hope yet. On the nerdlier front, remember the plot patent controversy? The Federal Circuit has added another reason to reject its premise  a technical ground that I did not wish to delve into in my screed.

[The] process as claimed does not transform any article to a different state or thing. Purported transformations or manipulations simply of public or private legal obligations or relationships, business risks, or other such abstractions cannot meet the test because they are not physical objects or substances, and they are not representative of physical objects or substances. Applicants' process at most incorporates only such ineligible transformations. As discussed earlier, the process as claimed encompasses the exchange of only options, which are simply legal rights to purchase some commodity at a given price in a given time period. The claim only refers to "transactions" involving the exchange of these legal rights at a "fixed rate corresponding to a risk position." Thus, claim 1 does not involve the transformation of any physical object or substance, or an electronic signal representative of any physical object or substance. Given its admitted failure to meet the machine implementation part of the test as well, the claim entirely fails the machine-or-transformation test and is not drawn to patent-eligible subject matter.

Given the apparent bigotry still remaining in this country (e.g., both Senatorial candidates from North Carolina and the returning Congressslime from the Minnesota 6th, as in the video on the right): Will they start calling it the "Black House" or the "Half-White House" now, in the interests of giving the "facts" and letting the viewer decide? Or just the un-American House?

Regardless of what they call his residence, the President-elect does not have a "mandate" under any rational basis. He won with approximately 52% of the vote. At this time, even seasoned observers can't agree on voter turnout; what that really means is that President-elect Obama was elected by only a plurality of those eligible to vote, which doesn't even consider those not eligible to vote and their opinions (even though they will be governed by him). Thus, we've got another four years of coalition politics and logrolling to look forward too. And that's the November Surprise.

The Fine Print

Ritual disclaimer: This blog contains legal commentary, but it is only general commentary. It does not constitute legal advice for your situation. It does not create an attorney-client relationship or any other expectation of confidentiality, nor is it an offer of representation.

I approve of no advertising appearing on or through syndication for anything other than the syndication itself; any such advertising violates the limited reuse license implied by voluntarily including syndication code on this blawg, and I do not approve aggregators and syndicators whose page design reflects only an intent to use the reference(s) to this blawg without actually providing the content from this blawg.

Internet link sausages, as frequently appear here, are gathered from uninspected meaty internet products and byproducts via processes you really, really don't want to observe; spiced with my own secret, snarky, sarcastic blend; quite possibly extended with sawdust or other indigestibles; and stuffed into your monitor (instead of either real or artificial casings). They're sort of like "link salad" or "pot pourri" or "miscellaneous musings" (or, for that matter, "making law"), but far more disturbing.

I am not responsible for any changes to your lipid counts or blood pressure from consuming these sausages... nor for your monitor if you insist on covering them with mash or sauce.

Blog Archive

Warped Weft

Now live at the new site. I have arranged some of the more infamous threads that have appeared here by unravelling them from the blawg tapestry (and hopefully eliminating some of the sillier typos). Sometimes, the threads have been slightly reordered for clarity.

Other Blawgs, Blogs, and Journals

These may be of interest; I do not necessarily agree with opinions expressed in them, although the reasoning and writing are almost always first-rate (and represent a standard seldom, if ever, achieved in "mainstream" journalism). I'm picky, and have eclectic tastes, so don't expect a comprehensive listing.

How Appealing is aimed at appellate lawyers and legal news in general. If you care about the state of the law, start here — Howard's commentary is far better balanced, better informed, and better considered than any of the media outlets. To concentrate on the US Supreme Court, don't forget SCOTUSBlog.

Some academics' blawgs with a variety of political (and doctrinal) viewpoints:

The main European IP blawg of interest remains the UK-based IPKat, on a variety of intellectual property issues, with some overlap (with a less Eurocentric view) at IPFinance

The American Constitution Society blawg is a purportedly "liberal" counterweight to the so-called "Federalist Society" (which, despite its claims, should be called "Tory Society") that has yet to establish much coherence... but maybe that's all to the good.

Approximate Views

(page impressions since the last time the server's counters were reset, at present early 2007)